J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2018; 16: 20–30

Journal ofInternational Cooperation for
Agricultural Development

Original

Farmers’ Perceptions of, and Preferred
Traits in, Rice Varieties in the Coastal
Region of Kenya and Their Implications
for Breeding
Ruth N. Musila1, 2), Julia Sibiya1), John Derera1), John M. Kimani2), Pangirayi Tongoona1) and
Kengo Danda1)
African Centre for Crop Improvement, School of Agricultural, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of
KwaZulu-Natal, Scottsville, Pietermaritzburg, Republic of South Africa
2)
Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organisation, Kaptagat Road, Loresho, Nairobi, Kenya
1)

Received December 13, 2017 Accepted March 15, 2018
Abstract. The adoption rate of new rice varieties in the coastal region of Kenya has been negligible, possibly because thefarmers’ special preferences are not taken into account during the breeding process. To bridge the gap between breeders andfarmers, and to ensure the faster release and widespread adoption of new varieties, participatory research was undertaken in
two major rain-fed rice-producing counties (Kwale and Kilifi) in coastal region of Kenya. The objectives were to determine
what rice varieties were grown by the farmers and what their trait preferences were. Results showed that, over 90% of
farmers grew landraces with preference differing between counties. The landrace Sigaye was preferred in Kilifi county while
Kitumbo, Madevu and supa dominated in Kwale county. Preferred traits of new rice varieties were high-yield, short-duration,
drought-tolerance, medium height, with white, long, bold grains of good baking quality. The good baking quality trait was
found to be a unique requirement in the region, because rice is rarely bred for its baking properties especially in Sub-SaharanAfrica. In this study, the role of farmers’ trait preferences were revealed in the adoption decisions when considering a newrice variety for the coastal region of Kenya. Future breeding programmes are encouraged to utilize farmer preferred landracesin their breeding programmes and incorporate farmer desired traits into new rice varieties for the region.
Key words: Rice, Oryza sativa, Farmers’ trait preferences, Landraces, Coastal region of Kenya

Introduction
Kenya’s coast is a net importer of food and its grain
production barely meets 20% of its annual requirement1).
Despite this, the region is endowed with untapped suitableland for rain-fed rice production and with irrigation waterfrom the Tana, Galana and Umba Rivers. Coupled with theavailable traditional knowledge of the local communities,
proper utilization of these resources may turn the region
Corresponding author: Ruth N. Musila, e-mail: ruthmusila@
gmail.com
20 J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2015

into a new frontier in rice farming, significantly reducing
the costly rice imports. However, rice production is still
under the subsistence farming system that is practiced
by smallholder farmers. Little progress has been made in
addressing the farmers’ needs and it has been the practice
to introduce accessions from international and regional
rice breeding programs, many of which are never adopted.
Consequently, rice yields in the region have remained very
low, ranging between 1.4 t ha–1 2) and 2.7 t ha–1 3), which isfar below the optimum of about 5.0 t ha–1 4) and the world’s
average of 4.0 t ha–1 5). The actual rice yields are similar
to those reported for Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), whichaverages 1.5 t ha–1 6), and this constitutes one of the main
challenges to rice production in SSA.
Although modern rice varieties have been developed
and released in most of the countries in SSA including Kenya, small-scale farmers especially in marginal areas still
rely on landraces for their planting7, 8). Though low yielding, rice landraces are invaluable inputs in local breeding
programme because they are well adapted to the local
environment and possess most of the attributes farmers
want introgressed into new rice cultivars. To enhance thepotential of adoption of new varieties in the marginal areas, farmer preferences for rice varieties should clearly be
identified6). This can be done using several methods suchas participatory rural appraisal (PRA) approach or surveys
either separately or in combination. Studies using thesemethods have shown that small scale farmers especiallyin marginal areas usually provide unique requirementson their preferred cultivars that are not so obvious to thebreeder9).
Cultivar traits commonly targeted in conventional breeding system include high yield, early-maturity, fertilizer
responsiveness and dwarfness10). However, some studies,
especially in SSA, have revealed that farmers’ preferredtraits rarely correlate with those of scientists7, 8). A studyin Sikasso Region of Mali revealed that farmers in therain-fed upland and lowland rice ecologies preferred tallvarieties and were willing to trade-off yield for grain quality and plant height. In contrast, farmers in the irrigatedecology preferred high-yielding, long-duration rice varieties7). In the Ashanti region of Ghana, farmers preferred
not only high-yielding varieties, but also varieties that had
specific grain quality attributes, such as white coloured,long, slender and translucent grains (low chalkiness), fragrance and preferred cooking quality8). From these studies,it can be concluded that farmers are well aware of theircultivar needs and that they prioritize these traits depending on the social-economic and environmental conditions
prevailing in their specific niches. It is therefore important
to determine from farmers their preferred traits in crop varieties. This enhances the potential for adoption of the newvarieties in the target region where studies are conducted.
Participatory rural appraisal tools and household surveys
have not been previously exploited to set rice breeding
goals for rice breeding in the coastal region of Kenya.
Therefore, the objectives of this study were to determine,by means of a household survey and participatory rural
appraisal tools, what rice varieties were grown by farmers
and what the farmers’ trait perceptions in rice cultivars
were, in the coastal region of Kenya.

Research Methodology
Description of the study area

The study was conducted in the Kwale and Kilifi counties of the coastal region of Kenya (Fig. 1) between December, 2013 and March, 2014. The Kwale county (4.18° S,
39.46° E) is located in the south-eastern corner of Kenya.
It has three administrative sub-counties, namely, Matuga,
Kinango, and Msambweni. The area has a mean monthly
temperature of 22ºC. Rainfall is bi-modal with short rains
being experienced from October to December, while thelong rains are experienced from March/April to July. The
annual rainfall ranges between 600 mm and 1200 mm11).
The Kilifi county (3.22° S, 40.12° E) is located south-eastof Nairobi and north of Mombasa. It has six administrative
sub-counties i.e. Kilifi, Ganze, Malindi, Magarini, Rabai
and Kaloleni. The area has a mean monthly temperatureof 23ºC. Rainfall pattern is bi-modal similar to that experienced in Kwale county. The average annual rainfall ranges
between 500 and 1000 mm11).
Sampling procedures

A multistage sampling procedure was used to select thesites for the study. Kwale and Kilifi counties were purposively chosen because they are the leading producers ofrain-fed lowland rice in coast region of Kenya3). In eachcounty, sampling was done at several administrative levels. One sub-county was selected per county. In the Kwale
county, the Msambweni sub-county was selected while in
the Kilifi county, the Kaloleni sub-county was selected.
From each sub-county a list of 20 villages of potential
rice growers was presented by the ministry of agriculture(MOA) extension officers from where four villages wererandomly selected. Villages selected were Mwagwei,
Bodo, Ganda and Bwiti in Msambweni sub-county andKizurini, Garashi, Vikindani and Chilulu in Kaloleni
sub-county. From the selected villages participants wererandomly selected.
Data collection

Primary data were collected, using both a household
survey (HHS) and participatory rural appraisal —a suitable tool in the context of exploratory and discovery purposes12). The household survey was administered by usingsemi-structured questionnaire. After developing the questionnaire, prior to the time of the exercise, the facilitators,
including the principal investigator, local MOA extension
officers from each sub-county, five trained enumeratorsand eight key informants, convened for a brain-storming
session to review and improve on the questionnaire.
Adjustments on the questionnaire were made during thisJ Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2018 21

Fig. 1. Administrative map of Kenya showing the study areas Kilifi and Kwale Counties (districts).

Table 1 Number of farmers’ interviewed in household survey and those who participated in focus
group discussions in Msambweni and Kaloleni sub-counties of coastal region of Kenya
Focus groups

Household survey

Male

FemaleMale

FemaleMwagwei
Bodo
Ganda
Bwiti

3
0
8
9

11
18
6
4

7
4
10
11

20
25
20
11

41
47
44
35

Kizurini
GarashiVikindani
Chilulu

0
2
4
5

9
10
6
7

4
3
5
3

26
24
25
26

39
39
40
41

31

71

47

177

Sub-county

Village

Msambweni

Kaloleni

Sub total
Total

102

meeting. Thereafter, the questionnaire was pre-tested on
two farms in Mwangwei village in Msambweni sub-county
and adjustments made accordingly. The HHS provided
information on general background of the respondents,
rice varieties grown by farmers and their use, the area
under rice production, crop management and agronomic
practices, seed sources, as well as the rice traits preferredby farmers and why. In total 224 farmers participated in
the household survey with a gender composition of 76%
female and 24% male (Table 1). The participatory rural
22 J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2018

224

Sub total

326

appraisal methodologies involved focus group discussions(FGD) and pair-wise ranking. The FGD was administeredusing a checklist. Local agricultural extension staff and village headsmen mobilized farmers for FGD. Farmers listed
the varieties that they grew, ranked them and identified thetraits they would prefer in the rice varieties. In addition,
pair-wise ranking was carried out to compare the pair-bypair traits of interest, while the groups were asked whichof the two they preferred, and why. One-hundred-and-two
farmers (70% female and 30% male) participated in theTable 2 Average farm size, average actual and potential area, years growing rice and average yield for rain-fed lowland riceconditions in Msambweni and Kaloleni sub-counties
Sub-county

Ave. farm
size (ha)Msambweni
Kaloleni

3.04
2.82

Ave. actual area under Ave. potential area underrice production (ha)rice production (ha)
0.4
0.2

0.8
0.4

Yield (t ha–1)Years
growing rice

Average

Min

Max

30
20

1.6
0.95

0.6
0.4

2.5
1.5

FGD (Table 1). Both formal and informal methodologies
were employed in data collection to enhance precision.
Data analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using the Statistical
Package for Social Scientists (Release 21) computer package13), and in Genstat 14th edition14). Relationships were explored through frequencies, descriptive statistics and crosstabulations for data collected in each sub-county, followedby mean comparisons between sub-counties. The rankingof the desired traits was evaluated, using the Kendall’s
coefficient of concordance (W) to identify which were themost important. The Kendall’s coefficient of concordance(W)15) is a measure of degree of agreement/concordance
among m set of n ranks. It is an index that measures theratio of the observed variance of the sum of ranks to the
maximum possible variance of sum of ranks. The essenceof this index is to find the sum of the ranks for each attribute/factor being ranked and to examine the variabilityof this sum. If the rankings are in perfect agreement, thevariability among these sums is said to be at minimum15).

Results
General crop production of rice

Although data is not shown, the study established thatrice is a staple food in the area under study. In Msambweni
sub-county, farmers have been growing rice for a longer
period of time than in Kaloleni sub-county (Table 2). On
average, the potential area for rice production owned byindividual farmers was twice the actual area. The rice
yield ranged from 0.4 to 2.5 t ha–1. About 95% of farmers interviewed in Kaloleni sub-county grew rice for
consumption (Fig. 2). This may be linked to their small
rice plots and low yields obtained from these plots. Only asmall percentage of the respondents (8%) in Msambweni
grew rice purely for cash. Farmers’ crop management andagronomic practices are shown in Table 3. In Msambweni,
broadcasting was the most common planting method (Fig.
3a). They believed that the method was less labour intensive, less time-consuming and not tiresome. The majorityof the farmers (98%) did not use inorganic fertilizer. The
use of organic manure was practiced by less than 10% of
the farmers. Different weeding times were reported forFig. 2. Proportion of farmers that grow rice for food, foodand cash, and cash in Msambweni and Kaloleni subcounties of coastal lowlands of Kenya.

the different counties. While majority of the farmers inMsambweni (64.8%) weeded their rice fields on average
three times, those in Kaloleni (69.8%) weeded only twice.
The first weeding was done using hoes while the second
and third weeding were done mainly by pulling out theweeds by hand. Rice harvesting was predominantly done
by cutting individual panicles with a knife (Fig. 3b). A
small percentage (3.6%) of the participating farmers used
sickles for harvesting.
Rice varieties grown and sources of seed

The majority of the farmers, over 99% in Msambweni
and 88% in Kaloleni, grew different rice landraces withover eleven landraces to choose from including Sigaye,
Kitumbo, Madevu, Supa etc. (Table 4). The New Rice for
Africa (NERICA) varieties6) were the only improved varieties grown in this region and were grown by one and 12%of the participating farmers in Msambweni and Kaloleni
sub-counties respectively. This shows that the region has
negligible adoption of improved rice varieties. Preference
for the most common landraces differed between the subcounties. In Msambweni, Kitumbo (65%) was the most
preferred followed by Madevu (56%) and Supa (52%).
In Kaloleni sub-county the majority of the farmers (90%)
grew the landrace Sigaye. The names of these landraces
J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2018 23

Table 3 Farmers practising different crop management and agronomic practices during
household survey in Msambweni and Kaloleni sub-counties (% of respondents)
Sub-county
Parameter
Planting Season
Long rains (March to August)
Short rains (October to December)
Method of land preparation
Manual LabourOx-ploughTractorPlanting
Sowing method
Dry seeding
Transplanting
Planting method
Row planting
Broadcasting
Dibbling
Fertilizer application
InorganicUse
Do not use
Organic
Use
Do not use
Weeding (Number of times)
Once
Twice
ThriceHarvesting
Cutting stems with a sickle
Cutting individual panicles

Fig. 3.

Overall(n=224)

Msambweni(n=108)

Kaloleni(n=116)

100.0
2.8

100.0
8.6

100.0
5.7

43.5
39.8
16.7

84.5
12.1
3.4

64.0
25.9
10.1

97.2
2.8

100.0
0.0

98.6
1.4

7.4
92.6
0.0

50.9
1.7
47.4

29.1
47.2
23.7

0.0
100.0

3.4
96.6

1.7
98.3

0.9
99.1

10.3
89.7

5.6
94.4

1.9
30.6
64.8

4.3
69.8
25.0

3.1
50.2
44.9

5.6
93.5

1.7
98.3

3.6
95.9

Farmer practices a) broadcasting and b) harvested individual rice panicles.

were indicative of the type of satisfaction farmers got fromgrowing the variety or were descriptive as they referred to
key identifiable characteristics. The name Sigaye meansno problem. The variety had big panicles with white, long,
24 J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2018

bold, and aromatic grains. Kitumbo means big stomach
and the named was derived from its short and bold grains.
Though low yielding, the variety was preferred because it
had a higher satiety value compared to other varieties thus

Table 4 Varieties mentioned and grown by farmers (% ofrespondents) in Msambweni and Kaloleni subcounties in coast Kenya
Variety
AmbaleSigayeKitumboMadevuKibawa cha nzi
Niwahi
Ringa
Kimachomacho
ManyoyaPishoriSupa
Other landraces
NERICA

Msambweni
sub-county

Kaloleni
sub-county

Number% ofof farmers farmers

Number% ofof farmers farmers

0
0
75
65
5
35
3
0
2
22
60
23
1

0
0
65
56
4
30
3
0
2
19
52
20
1

20
97
0
0
4
0
0
1
0
15
21
10
13

19
90
0
0
4
0
0
1
0
14
19
9
12

grown for food. The name Madevu was derived from thephysical characteristics of its paddy grain, which had longawns shielding the grain from bird damage. The variety
had medium to late maturing cycle and was mostly grown
for food. The name Supa means the best or excellent grain
quality and was characterized by big panicles with white,
longer, bold, tasty and aromatic kernels, and a good milling
quality. This variety was mostly grown for market.
There were landraces that were grown specifically for
confectionery purposes (Table 5). The landrace Pishori
was the most preferred especially for traditional breadmaking by 34 and 10% of the participating farmers inMsambweni and Kaloleni sub-counties respectively (Table5). The variety was low yielding, highly aromatic, withwhite, long and slender kernels. Other rice confectionary
products made by the farmers were Vitumbua, Kibibi, andMatobosho.
Sources of seed of the varieties grown by farmers arepresented in Table 6. Farmers generally obtained rice seedfrom informal sources. Among the informal sources themain source of seed was farmers own harvest (recycledseed), followed by seed obtained from the local market.
Very few farmers received seed of the introduced NERICA
varieties from MOA.
Preferred rice characteristics

Results from the household survey showed that there
were significant differences in farmers’ preferences forrice traits between the sub-counties, since the computed
chi-square value was larger than the corresponding tabular
value with 16 degrees of freedom at a 5% and 1% level ofsignificance (Table 7). However, ranking of the first six

Table 5 Landraces grown by farmers (number and % of respondents) for confectionary purposes in rain-fed
lowland ecology in coast region of Kenya
Landrace
PishoriMadevuNiwahi
Kivunga
SigayeRinga
Kibawa cha inzi
Kimachomacho
Supa
Manyoya
AmbariRizikiMsambweni
sub-county

Kaloleni
sub-county

Number% ofof farmers farmers

Number% ofof farmers farmers

39
18
16
10
0
4
3
3
3
2
0
1

34
16
14
9
0
3
3
3
3
2
0
1

11
0
0
0
6
0
2
0
0
0
1
0

10
0
0
0
6
0
2
0
0
0
1
0

Table 6 Percentage of farmers obtaining rice seeds fromdifferent sources in Msambweni and Kaloleni
sub-counties
Source of seed
Own (Farm Saved)
Neighbours
Local Market
Own + Neighbours
Own + Market
Neighbours + Market
Own + Neighbours + Market
MOA*

Sub-county
Msambweni

Kaloleni

35.9
14.6
31.1
1.0
10.7
1.9
3.9
1.0

43.9
14.3
21.4
12.2
5.1
1.0
0.0
2.0

* Ministry of Agriculture

traits was similar for the two sub-counties. A high-yield
was considered to be the most important trait. This wasfollowed by drought-tolerance, early-maturity, aroma,
good weed competitor, and high-tillering-ability. Preference for any other trait differed among counties. A goodbaking quality was a unique trait mentioned by 66% of
the farmers in Msambweni, compared to 22% in Kaloleni.
Farmers cited nine characteristics associated with good
dough for making rice bread (Table 8). Important traits
cited by over 25% of the respondents in Msambweni werethat the dough should become porous, swell and rise up
and has a soft texture as shown in Fig. 4
Results from the focus group discussions indicated thatacross the counties, the Kendall’s W of 0.749 was significant at a 1% level, suggesting that 75% of the farmers
agreed on the outcome of the ranking (Table 9). The trait
J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2018 25

Table 7 Preferred traits in rice cultivars as indicated by farmers during the household survey (% ofrespondents and ranking)Sub-county
TraitsHigh yielding
Drought stress tolerance
Short growing cycle/early maturity
Aroma
Good weed competitor
High number of tillers
Good taste
White grain colour
Long and bold grains
Medium plant height
Good baking quality
Tolerant to low soil fertility
Tall plant height
Short plant height
Medium growing cycle
Long growing cycle
Feed for livestock

Msambweni
%
Rank
100.0
96.3
92.6
91.7
76.9
73.1
68.5
60.2
71.3
46.3
66.7
34.3
27.8
5.6
1.9
1.9
0.0

Kaloleni
%
Rank

1
2
3
4
5
6
8
10
7
11
9
12
13
14
15
16
17

100.0
100.0
94.8
91.4
86.2
79.3
67.2
75.9
57.8
71.6
22.4
39.7
3.4
7.8
0.9
0.0
0.9

1
1
3
4
5
6
9
7
10
8
12
11
14
13
15
17
16

Across
%

Rank

100.0
98.2
93.8
91.5
81.7
76.3
67.9
67.4
64.3
59.4
43.8
37.1
15.2
6.7
1.3
0.9
0.4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Chi-square computed value =61.82 and tabulated values with 16 d.f, at the 0.05 and 0.01 level of significanceis 27.59 and 33.41

Table 8 Traits associated with good dough for making rice bread (Number and % of
respondents)
Msambweni sub-county

Kaloleni sub county

Traits for bread types

Number offarmers% offarmers

Number offarmers% offarmers

White flour
Porous (air spaces)
Swells and rises up
Soft texture
Low fat content
None sticky
Aroma
Tasty
Absorbs little water

11
35
30
30
24
7
4
24
6

9.5
30.2
25.9
25.9
20.7
6
3.4
20.7
5.2

6
18
16
9
2
1
3
2
0

5.6
16.7
14.8
8.3
1.8
0.9
2.8
1.9
0

of being a good weed competitor scored poorly under the
FGD compared to the scoring of individual farmers. Thisis because farmers in the FGD perceived that the problem
of weed competition would partly be solved by practicing
the recommended agronomic practices such as a good
land preparation, row planting and use of quality seed
for planting. Overall, results from both the HHS survey
and the FGD indicated that most farmers would prefer tohave high-yielding, early-maturing and drought-tolerantvarieties. Aroma and good taste were the most preferredsubjective traits.
Fig. 4.

Sliced traditional rice bread showing air spaces(porous)26 J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2018

Table 9 Ranking from scores of pairwise ranking of the traits preferred by the farmers during focus group discussions
TraitsMsambweni

Kaloleni

Overall

Mean rank

Rank

Mean rank

Rank

Mean rank

Rank

High yielding
Short growing cycle/early maturity
Drought stress tolerance
High tiller number
Aroma
Medium plant height
Good taste
Long and bold grains
Resistant to pests and diseases
Heavy panicles
Low input use
Resistance to bird damage
Good Shattering
Good baking quality
Weed competitor

1.0
2.6
3.8
5.9
4.4
5.8
6.4
8.2
9.4
10.6
12.1
11.8
13.9
10.2
14.0

1
2
3
6
4
5
7
8
9
11
13
12
14
10
15

1.5
2.8
2.9
4.5
6.4
7.1
9.4
9.5
8.5
7.2
9.5
12.5
10.5
15.0
12.8

1
2
3
1
5
6
9
10
8
7
10
13
12
15
14

1.2
2.7
3.3
5.2
5.4
6.2
7.7
8.9
8.9
8.9
10.8
12.1
12.2
12.6
13.4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
8
8
11
12
13
14
15

Kendall’s W (Significance)

0.851 (0.001)

Discussion
In the current study female farmers (76%) predominatedin the cultivation of rice in the rain-fed lowland ecology
of coastal lowland Kenya. Another study also reported
that women in coastal region of Kenya are responsible for
producing food crops, while men tend to be responsible
for growing and marketing tree crops such as coconut andcashew nuts16). Predominance of female farmers in production of rice in the rain-fed lowland ecosystem has also beenreported in other regions7). However, gender dimensions ofrice production in Kenya indicate that involvement of female farmers in rice production adversely affects adoption
and up-scaling of rice technologies because women hardly
attend seminars and training workshops5). Efforts should
therefore be made to deliberately engage female farmers
in participatory plant breeding to determine their varietal
needs and priorities.
Farmers used manual labour to prepare their rice fields.
This partly explains why the average actual area under riceproduction in the region was less by half the potential area.
Broadcasting was the common planting method because
the farmers believed that the method was less labour
intensive, less time-consuming and not tiresome. Broadcasting is a common practice among small scale farmers
in rain-fed lowland and irrigated ecologies in Sub-SaharanAfrica7). On average the seeding rate was about 70 kg ha–1
compared to 45 kg ha–1 if drilling or dribbling method wereused17). Therefore farmers should be encouraged to explore
other faster land preparation methods and adopt efficientplanting method to cultivate more land. The majority of
the farmers (97–100%) did not apply inorganic fertilizer

0.784 (0.001)

0.749 (0.001)

to their rice fields. Their perception was that rice is likea grass and therefore has the capacity to sustain itself
under natural conditions. They believed that their soils
were adequately fertile, and their lack of knowledge on
how to apply inorganic fertilizers was among one of thereasons why they did not apply it. Similar beliefs werealso displayed in the results of a survey on the adoptionof maize production technologies in the coastal lowlandsof Kenya16). Although soils in the rain-fed lowland ecologies are believed to be richer in terms soil nutrients due toerosion of soil nutrient and debris from the upland fields7),
this may not be so in the coastal region of Kenya. In thisregion the soils are mainly sandy with low nitrogen as amajor limiting element as it is easily leached during heavy
rains18). The water holding capacity and cation exchange
capacity are extremely low resulting in poor efficiency
of inorganic fertilizers and low crop production. Due tonegligible usage of inorganic fertilizers by farmers, it isimperative that rice breeding programmes for the region
develop rice varieties that respond to low nitrogen andother plant nutrients.
Farmers depended on informal seed sources which included farm saved, local market and neighbors. The disadvantages of using farmers own seed was that the seed wasof poor quality, and had seed admixtures resulting in poor
crop establishment and low yields. The implications werethat there was need for involving farmers in community
seed programmes that includes training on seed cleaning,
selection and storage. There was low usage of certified
seed of improved varieties due to limited supply since it
was sourced from Mwea, in Kirinyanga County, anotherrice growing region creating geographical inconveniences.
J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2018 27

One of the solution to availability of certified seed in theregion could be identification and training of rice seed
growers within the community.
Landraces were the dominant rice varieties grown by
farmers (over 90%) with over eleven varieties to choose
from. Farmers preferred growing their landraces mainly
for taste, aroma, tolerance to drought, resistant to bird
damage and other farmer specific attributes. For example
farmers preferred growing Kitumbo for its drought tolerance attribute. Research evaluations of some exotic andlocal landraces under water stress and no-water stress conditions confirmed that Kitumbo was moderately droughttolerant during the reproductive phase19). Supa was grown
for sale and fetched a higher premium than the other varieties because of its good grain quality, fragrance and good
milling quality. Apart from growing rice to be used asboiled rice grain, farmers also grew rice for confectionery
purposes. About eight varieties were perceived suitable for
production of rice based products such as bread, Vitumbua, Kibibi, and Matobosho. Farmers had identified thesevarieties based on physical dough characteristics of therice flour. However, based on chemical properties of therice flour some landraces and improved rice varieties havebeen shown to be suitable for rice flour bread. For example
in Japan, the Japanese rice cultivars Koshihikari and Nipponbare and in South Korea, Chenmaai and Gaomibyeo
were found to be suitable for production of rice bread20,21).
Chemical properties of the bread types in the region are yet
to be elucidated. Farmers’ high preference for their landraces suggested that breeders would make impact by improving or breeding from these landraces because they are
already adapted to the local environment and possess mostof the grain quality traits preferred by farmers. Despite
wide dissemination and adoption of NERICA varieties allover Africa, only a small percentage (1 to 12%) of farmers
in the region were growing these varieties. Although farmers were willing to adopt these varieties, unavailability of
seed was one of the major reasons farmers gave for not
growing these varieties.
In terms of trait preference farmers generally preferredhigh yield as the first trait they would desire in new ricecultivars. Rice yields in the farmers’ fields were low andhighly variable ranging from 0.4 to 2.5 t ha–1. The low
yields observed in these communities were comparable tothose reported for most of smallholder farmers growing
rice in rain-fed lowlands in sub-Saharan Africa which
average 2 t ha–1 against a potential of 5 t ha–1 6). The significant yield gap between farmers yield and the yield potential could be attributed to use of poor quality seed, highweed infestation, low-input farming due to lack of capital,
limited knowledge on the best bet agronomic practices
and overreliance of low yielding landraces among other
28 J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2018

factors. Results from researcher managed trials using seedof Supa landrace collected from the region showed thatthe variety was low yielding with an average yield of 1.4
t ha–1 2). The yield potential of the other farmer preferred
local varieties under research managed trials is yet to be
confirmed. Efforts should therefore be made to address therice production constraints contributing to low yields aswell as develop new high yielding varieties for the region.
Next to high yield was desire for short growing cycle anddrought tolerant varieties. Farmers’ preference for shortduration and drought-tolerant varieties was compelled bytheir observation that most of their preferred varieties had
long growing cycle and were severely affected if drought
occurred during the flowering stage, resulting in low yields
and, in some cases, complete crop failure. In anotherstudy it was confirmed that Kitumbo and Supa had a longgrowing cycle of about 150 days19). Farmers were quick
to mention that the major cause of drought in the region
was what was locally termed as “Upepo Mkali”, or “Junewinds”, emanating from the Indian Ocean between May
and June, which coincides with the reproductive stage ofthe rice crop1).
Of the subjective traits, farmers preferred aroma,
taste and long bold white rice. In contrast a PRA study
conducted in Sikasso region of Mali showed that taste
and aroma where least preferred while long red rice waspreferred to long white rice7). This indicates that farmers
differ in their trait preferences which should be taken
into account in breeding programmes. One of the uniquesubjective traits preferred by farmers was good baking
quality for rice bread. Use of rice flour for production ofrice flour-based products such as bread is rare especiallyin Sub-Saharan Africa where rice has traditionally beenused as boiled rice. However, in the coastal lowlandsof Kenya rice bread is one of the cultural rice products
common in most traditional ceremonies. It is also cheap
and convenient for breakfast and the farmer could saveon the limited financial resources. The criterion given byfarmers for identifying and selecting suitable varieties for
traditional rice bread were; white milled rice flour witha low fat content, the dough should be easy to work on,
it should absorb little water, it should swell, rise up andbecome porous, and it should not stick onto the baking tin
while baking. As mentioned earlier farmers predicted ricebread quality traits from the physical dough characteristicsof the rice flour. However, chemical properties of rice flour
give a better prediction of rice bread quality21). Thus an opportunity does exist to assess the suitability of the rice flourof the farmer selected bread types for production of ricebread. Overall, the results showed that rice traits desiredby farmers in new rice cultivars for the coastal lowlands of
Kenya were varied indicating differential alleles of genes

controlling these traits. Different selection indices may be
adopted to develop different farmer preferred high yielding, short growing cycle and drought tolerant varieties forboiled grain and rice flour. In developing such selection
indices a participatory plant breeding approach involving
the relevant rice stakeholders should be adopted.

Conclusions
The study established that predominantly farmers
cultivated landraces with negligible cultivation of modern
varieties such as NERICA and that rice was grown mainly
for consumption as boiled grain rice and/or traditional ricebread. Farmers valued their landraces because they had
certain key identifiable characteristics they treasured andwhich they wished would also to be introgressed in newrice cultivars. High grain yield was the most important
trait preferred by farmers. Next to high yield were shortgrowing cycle and drought tolerant varieties preferred by
farmers as a mitigation strategy to cope with the unreliable
rainfall. A rare farmer-desired trait observed in this study
was preference for good bread quality traits. Overall, theresults imply that there were unique requirements for riceimprovement and adoption of new rice cultivars by smallholder farmers growing rice in the rain-fed lowland ecology in coastal lowlands of Kenya. Thus involving farmers
in the breeding and selection process through participatory
breeding will ensure that farmers’ priorities and needs areincorporated in the existing local varieties or in creation of
new varieties.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the Alliance for Green
Revolution in Africa (AGRA). The authors also acknowledge all the agricultural extension officers in the study
areas for the enormous role they played in organizing
farmers.
References
1. Muti SM, Kibe AM. (2009) The effects of east African
low level jet on food security in horn of Africa: a casestudy of coastal region of Kenya. Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development 9, 1761-1777.
2. Kega VM. and Maingu AR. (2008). Evaluation of
New Rice for Africa (NERICA) cultivars in coastal
lowlands Kenya. In: Esilaba AO. et al., (eds) Proceedings of the 10th KARI biennial scientific conference.
Responding to demands and opportunities throughinnovative agricultural technologies, knowledge andapproaches, KARI Headquarters. 12-17 November
2006. Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI),
Loresho, Nairobi, Kenya, pp. 1-5.

3. United States Agency for International Development(USAID). (2010). Staple foods value chain analysis.
Country report-Kenya. Chemonics International Inc.
4. Ministry of Agriculture (MOA). (2009). National Rice
Development Strategy (NRDS), 2008-2018. pp. 5-8.
5. Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries(MoALF). (2014). National Rice Development Strategy (NRDS) implementation framework (2014-2018).
6. Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice). (2010). New Breeding Directions at AfricaRice: Beyond NERICA.
Cotonou, Benin: 24 pp.
7. Efisue A., Tongoona P, Derera J, Langyintuo A, Laing
MD, Ubi B. (2008). Farmers’ perceptions on rice varieties in Sikasso region of Mali and their implications
for rice breeding. Journal of Agronomy and Crop
Science 194: 393-400. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439037X.2008.00324.x.
8. Asante MD, Asante BO, Acheampong GK, Wiredu
AN, Offei SK., Gracen V, Adu- Dapaah H, Danquah
EY. (2013). Grain quality and determinants of farmers’ preference for rice varietal traits in three districtsof Ghana: Implications for research and policy. Journal of Devevelopment and Agricultural Economics 5:284-294.
9. Sperling L, Ashby JA., Smith ME., Weltzien E,
McGuire S. (2001). A framework for analyzing
participatory plant breeding approaches and results.
Euphytica 122: 439-450.
10. Morris, M.L and Bellon, M.R. (2004) Participatory
plant breeding research: Opportunities and challenges
for the international crop improvement system. Euphytica 136: 21-35.
11. Jaetzold R, Schmidt H. (1983). Farm managementof Kenya. In: National conditions and farm management information. East Kenya (Eastern and Coast
Provinces). Farm Management Branch, Ministry ofAgriculture, Nairobi, Kenya, pp. 325-366.
12. Phillips BS. (1968). Social research; strategy andtactics, 4th printing. London
13. SPSS Inc. (2012) SPSS Statistics 21.0, SPSS INC.,
Chicago, IL.
14. Payne RW, Murray DA, Harding SA, Baird DB, Soutar
DM. (2011). GenStat for Windows (14th Edition) Introduction. VSN International, Hemel Hempstead.
15. Mattson DE. (1986). Statistics: Difficult concepts
understandable explanations. Bolchazy-Carducci Pub.
Publisher, pp. 281-283.
16. Wekesa E, Mwangi W, Verkuijl H, Danda K, GrooteHD. (2003). Adoption of maize production technologies in the coastal lowlands of Kenya. International
Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT)
publisher, Mexico, D.F.
17. De Datta SK. (1981). Principles and practices of riceproduction. John Wiley and Sons, New York, p. 618.
J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2018 29

18. Mureithi JG, Tayler RS, Thorpe W. (1995). Productivity of alley farming with leucaena (Leucaena
leucocephala Lam. de Wit) and Napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum K. Schum) in coastal lowland Kenya
Agroforestry Systems 31: 59-78.
19. Musila RN. (2015) Genetic analysis for drought tolerance and yield stability in interspecific and Oryza
Sativa L. rice germplasm. PhD thesis, University ofKwazulu-Natal, Republic of South Africa.

30 J Intl Cooper Agric Dev 2018

20. Araki E, Ashida K, Aoki N, Takahashi M, Hamada
S. (2016) Characteristics of rice flour suitable for the
production of rice flour bread containing gluten andmethods of reducing the cost of producing rice flour.
Japan Agricultural Research Quarterly 50: 23-31.
21. Han H, Cho JH, Kang HW, Koh BK. (2012). Ricevarieties in relation to rice bread quality Journal of
Science, Food and Agriculture 92: 1462-1467.